A regional confrontation is boiling over after Phase 3 of the Westlock Regional Water Services Commission’s (WRWSC) waterline north project was postponed indefinitely, prompting Westlock County to send a letter to Municipal Affairs asking for “assistance in governing and administration of the commission.”
At the Dec. 19 Westlock County council meeting, Coun. Dennis Primeau put forward a motion to send the letter, which passed unanimously.
“The water commission is at a point where it’s totally dysfunctional,” said Primeau. “We need direction from the ministry as to where we can go from this. The line isn’t going to go anywhere until the town gets on board and that’s not likely to happen.”
A motion to begin work on the Phase 3 waterline north project as far north as Jarvie was defeated 3-3 at the WRWSC’s Dec. 12 meeting. Commission members Primeau, Jared Stitsen and Allan Van Eaton supported the motion, while Curtis Snell, David Truckey and chairman Clem Fagnan voted against it.
“It’s very sad to see that the grant funding for 90 per cent of this project will not be used,” said Stitsen. “It’s not very often the government hands out money in this large of a sum and people can’t work together to use it.”
Because the tender for the current project expired Dec. 24, the project is now shelved indefinitely while the commission applies for an extension to the $6.2 million grant and the March 31, 2018 deadline.
Fagnan said that the $7.1 million cost estimates for the project were based on 2012 figures. After the project went to tender in 2017, the cost had increased by over $2 million. The Water For Life grant only covers 90 per cent of the original estimate, meaning for work to go ahead the commission would have had to increase its debt limit by another $500,000. However, the debt limit is already at $11.8 million.
“That’s putting us in a precarious position,” he said. “If something happens to the system, we won’t have any money to fix it. We have reserves, but we can only cover so much.”
He pointed out that if the commission did the first portion of the line to Jarvie, they would be violating the terms of the grant, which could put the commission in hot water.
He added that if the commission spends money it doesn’t have, the commissioners are liable for the costs.
“Not all the members were prepared to take that risk,” he said. “We can’t award the contracts if we don’t know if we’re going to get the extension.”
Fagnan said that the next step was for the commission to apply for more time to complete the project and apply for another $1.6 million grant to cover the costs. Should that go forward, the deadline would move to March 31, 2019 and the line would be constructed over the 2018-19 winter season.
He added that anything that has to go before the minister would likely take an additional two months at minimum before the commission had an answer.
The decision has exposed friction between the town and county within the commission, with the town claiming that it is doing all the heavy lifting and the county accusing the town of trying to force the commission into accepting its terms.
“The water commission is supposed to be a standalone organization,” said Primeau. “The town is basically saying that we either renegotiate the water rates or we’re not going to get the line. That’s town interfering in the operations of the water commission.”
Primeau cited a letter that was sent to the commission members from Town of Westlock mayor Ralph Leriger in November that requested a review of water service rates.
The current WRWSC bylaw states that the rate charged by the commission is the same for all customers, $2.30/m3.
In his letter, Leriger pointed out that the town’s utility holders cover 93 per cent of the costs of the water lines. The letter suggested rates ranging from $2.03/m3 for the Town of Westlock to $9.71/m3 for the Hamlet of Vimy.
Leriger said that the commission’s system is based on the American Water Works Association’s manual for best practices, which calls for rates to be shared according to the cost of providing the utility to customers.
“It’s just simple math. Those numbers we provided come right out of the water commission’s budget and they show that the town users are subsidizing the rural users by $189,000 a year,” he said.
“The purpose of the letter was to draw our partners’ attention to the problem and start a conversation.”
Expressing frustration with the situation, Fagnan pointed out that the bylaw governing rates was written in 2008 and since then the situation has changed.
“The town just wants to review the rates. A bylaw can be changed and rates can be changed,” he said. “You don’t keep the same rates for 25 years, you do your one-, three-, five- and 20-year plans and adjust them every year.”
He added that there was no actual decision made by the commission about the letter.
Caught in the middle of all this is Van Eaton of the Village of Clyde, who voted in favour of building the line, but was not upset about the fact the motion was defeated.
He noted that the letter from the town was intended to initiate a dialogue between the councils.
“That will be dealt with on a council level. It was more for information for us,” he said.
“It’s the councils that will have to decide what to do, or not do.”
Compounding the situation is the need to find a new manager for the commission after WRWSC manager Mark Oberg resigned during the Dec. 12 meeting.
Oberg told the Westlock News that he resigned for personal reasons but will remain in the position until Feb. 15.
No plan for his replacement has been put forward as of yet.
